NRM has become a liability for its sponsors and supporters

The National Resistance Movement (NRM) came to power with domestic and external sponsors (those who fund and champion its cause) and gained supporters (those who are won over). The original sponsors and supporters of NRM inside Uganda had suffered political losses under Obote’s government – Catholics had lost elections twice to UPC and Buganda had lost the kingdom and ‘Lost counties’ referendum. Those who sponsored and supported NRM outside Uganda did not trust Obote despite his pledge to introduce capitalism under structural adjustment. They believed he was still a socialist and could not be trusted. The common characteristic is that those against Obote and UPC were in a hurry and could not wait for the next elections in 1985 or 1986 to defeat UPC that won the 1980 elections. They chose a military option for quicker results. Various guerrilla groups were formed, some of them merged into the NRM. NRM captured power in 1986 exactly five years when elections were due. So the results were not quicker but were clearly very destructive of lives, property and infrastructure and many deficits still remain unresolved.

Museveni: The people of Uganda are coming

You have taken us for granted for too long. You hood winked us with your ten point program when you knew you were not going to implement it. Instead of development you have brought hell on Uganda soil. You have reduced a country of hardworking, innovative and cheerful people to a semi-desert where rivers are disappearing, lakes are shrinking and water tables are dropping. Hospitals have turned into hospices, maternal mortality and insanity rates are on the rise. Ugandans have become number one alcohol consumer in the world. You are selling food to earn foreign currency when Ugandans are starving to death. You have refused to allocate money for primary school lunch causing girls to drop out of school and forced into teenage pregnancy and having children they cannot afford. You are encouraging poor families to practice birth control for lack of resources, yet you are selling or leasing Uganda land to foreigners to produce food for their people. Land is the only asset Ugandans have. Education has not provided them an alternative source of income.

Museveni’s use of force has become counterproductive

There is consensus that Museveni is a leader guided by a unique philosophy based on the use of force and fear, dependence on foreigners and regional focus that has made his presidency counter-productive, calling for his defeat in 2011 elections. Museveni’s defeat is very important for Uganda, neighboring countries and development partners in order to avoid heavier losses in the future. Thick clouds are gathering on the political horizon and if they are not dissipated quickly they could unleash a very destructive storm. If preventive steps had been taken Ethiopia and Zaire could have avoided the adverse impact of 1974 and 1996/7 events respectively. To prevent the possibility of such events occurring in Uganda, we need to adopt a preventive strategy because it is always cheaper than cure. We should at all times avoid emotions about what Museveni has done for or against us. We should be guided only by considerations of dignity, liberty/freedom and equality of all Ugandans. We should seek and tell the truth because a diversion will be catastrophic. For easy reference let us review the rationale behind Museveni’s philosophy.

Privatization of Uganda’s public enterprises was Thatcher’s idea

In her article dated December 7, 2010 on Uganda parastatals, Kesaasi wrote that privatization of Uganda public enterprises was not Museveni’s idea. It was Margaret Thatcher’s! This reminded me of work I did a few years ago about similarities between UK’s and Uganda’s development programs.

While researching and writing about structural adjustment programs (SAPs) or Washington Consensus around the world (Chile, Bolivia, Poland, Russia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Uganda, Ghana, Tanzania and Zambia etc), I found that the similarities between Thatcher’s and Museveni’s structural adjustment programs were very striking. It was as though Uganda was a part of Britain run by British officials and institutions under Margaret Thatcher as prime minister. I decided to study it in a historical perspective and to identify which areas were similar and with what impact on the people in the two countries. I compressed the findings into chapter three on ‘Structural Adjustment in the UK and Uganda: Are there Similarities?’ in my book titled “Uganda’s Development Agenda in the 21st Century and Related Regional Issues (2008)” available at www.jonesharvest.com.

Museveni could easily become the first hereditary Muhororo king of Uganda

A forecaster is a person who, using available information, estimates, calculates or predicts in advance what will happen in future. Based on information at hand, it is possible to foretell that Museveni plans to become the first hereditary king of Uganda kingdom. What are the ingredients for this prediction?

1. It is not a secret any longer that Museveni entertains the notion of creating a Tutsi Empire with himself as the first Emperor. Museveni believes very strongly in using military might to realize what he wants. Other strategies are supplementary. And that is why democracy in Uganda is conducted at gun point. There is sufficient information about Museveni’s military/political intervention in Burundi, Rwanda and DRC as preparation for Tutsi Empire. If Mugabe had not intervened in DRC war, Museveni would probably have realized his dream. As is now known Mugabe entered the war principally to stop Museveni from creating a Tutsi Empire in Middle Africa (J. N. Weatherby 2003). Besides military intervention, Museveni is indirectly pushing Tutsi Empire through the East African economic integration and political federation. Museveni has even talked about a federation larger than the Great Lakes one. On April 4, 1997, it is reported that Museveni stated “My mission is to see that Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi and Zaire [DRC] become federal states under one nation [and one leader]” (EIR Special Report 1997). Thus, Uganda kingdom is an integral part of this scheme. The following steps have been or are being taken to create Uganda kingdom.

Uganda’s elections project has failed

Every project in human history has at least four phases: the design phase, implementation phase, monitoring phase and evaluation phase. The purpose of monitoring is to ensure that the implementation of the project is on course as designed. When new problems arise they are corrected. When circumstances change fundamentally, it may become necessary to close the project and draw up a new one. An evaluation takes place usually at the end of the project to see whether the objectives were achieved or not and to draw lessons as a guide for future work.

The purpose of an election is to offer voters the opportunity to select their representatives in free and fair conditions. During the campaign candidates propose what they would do if elected to improve the standard of living of their constituents. If they do not deliver, they are voted out at the next elections. Thus, representatives’ primary responsibility is to serve all the people in their constituencies whether they elected them or not. In Uganda, it has turned out that the primary and perhaps only purpose of representatives is to enrich themselves, their families, relatives and friends. Take Rujumbura constituency as an example (no disrespect intended). The wife of the Member of Parliament (MP) is Senior Presidential Adviser and his sister in-law is also Senior Presidential Adviser! There are many others down the line. This is a case of winner-take-all.

Why has birth control become a priority in Rwanda and Uganda?

Whatever justification is advanced for birth control, such as eradication of maternal and infant mortality, the ultimate outcome is reduction in population size at family, community, tribal and national level. Because of cultural, ethnic and religious sensitivity associated with birth control, different terms have been used such as family planning and reproductive health and rights. However, they all end up in reducing population size.

The common message conveyed by Malthus and his heirs is that poor people (regardless of how they got trapped into poverty) wherever they live produce more children than they are able to support. Therefore they must reduce the size of their families through family planning.

In Rwanda and Uganda, a combination of wars, endemic diseases and AIDS pandemic has raised mortality rates. In Uganda, for example, life expectancy declined from 47.0 years in 1980-85 to 41.0 years in 1990-95. At the same time, thanks to western donations, the economies of Rwanda and Uganda are growing faster than population growth. Consequently, birth control should not be a priority needing urgent implementation.

Why has Rukungiri district become ungovernable?

Rukungiri is a small district located in southwest Uganda and far away from the seat of government in Kampala. Since Uganda’s independence in 1962, Rukungiri has been visited by Uganda presidents – Obote, Amin and more so by Museveni – or sent more delegations to Kampala than any other district in an attempt to understand and solve the district’s intractable problems. These problems of a political, economic, social and ethnic nature have included suicide, death or injuries from security forces’ gunfire, forcing people into exile or fleeing permanently from the district, snatching voting cards from opposition members at gun point and using some unsealed ballot boxes including in the opposition presidential candidate’s polling station.

Although many people do not want to hear it, the problem in Rukungiri district is the political and economic struggle between Nilotic Bahororo rulers and Bantu Bairu (slaves) ruled ethnic groups since pre-colonial days. Bahororo – a Batutsi and numerically very inferior group that entered Rukungiri district in 1800 from Rwanda via short-lived Mpororo kingdom located in southwest of former Ankole district – believe that God created them to rule others irrespective of their education and/or work experience. In fact Bahororo agree that God gave Bairu physical and mental strength to labor for the comfort of their Bahororo masters who have specialized in military strength. This superiority complex of Bahororo was consolidated during British colonial rule that used pre-colonial oppressive chiefs as their civil servants. Britain which never lost control over Uganda has continued to favor Bahororo over Bairu since independence.

President Museveni’s scary statement should be opposed

President Museveni’s speech delivered at Hoima on June 11, 2010 is very scary indeed. Ugandans and their friends must not allow his scary remarks to be repeated or put into action.

When President Museveni, a head of state and chairman of the ruling party, talked about cutting someone’s head for entering his olubimbi (territory) was he saying, for example, that:

  1. opposition parties cannot aspire to form a government in Uganda with a new president
  2. poor people cannot aspire to become rich
  3. illiterate people cannot aspire to be educated
  4. women cannot aspire to inherit their parents’ properties
  5. women cannot aspire to work outside of the home and earn an income
  6. raw material exporting countries cannot aspire to industrialize?

If our understanding of his message is correct, then President Museveni is advocating a static division of labor or comparative advantage which is very difficult to accept. For example, Uganda cannot and should not accept to remain a producer and exporter of raw materials because we do not want to enter the lubimbi or territory of industrialized countries. This lubimbi concept explains why under Museveni’s leadership Uganda has de-industrialized.

When will Uganda become an independent country?

According to Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary independent means, inter alia; not dependent; not subject to the control, influence, or determination of another or others; not subordinate; not depending on another for financial support; self-commanding or self-directing; bold, unstrained and controlling or governing oneself.

After the Second World War, British colonial authorities realized that time had come to involve African participation in colonial administration and to make sure that there was an orderly transfer of power to stable, pro-British governments. The innovative policies designed by Arthur Creech Jones and Andrew Cohen in 1947 represented an attempt to anticipate the growth of nationalism and as the first steps in creating a future ‘informal’ empire. These proposed initiatives were to remain confidential. London was expected to conceal its hand and to “withhold from aspiring colonial politicians the knowledge that Britain had already decided to reward them in the future with political power” (L. J. Butler 2002).